State gay juggernaut slowed in Henderson
Citizens concerned about gay ordinance elect new City Commission
From, Kentucky Citizen Digest, January/February, 2001.

The blitz of gay-rights ordinances that hit several Kentucky communities in 1999 has run into its first real snag in Henderson with the Nov. 7 election.  There the new slate of four city commissioners has swayed the vote margin against special rights for homosexuals, promising to repeal the so-called “Fairness Ordinance” early in 2001.

In the fall of 1999, the city passed an ordinance granting special rights for gays in housing, employment and public accommodations. Several public meetings drew hundreds of Henderson’s citizens protesting the proposed ordinance that eventually passed by a 3-2 margin. However, within four months of that vote four candidates opposed to the ordinance emerged and filed to run for city commission. They were later joined by three more candidates.

Critics claim that the local newspaper attempted to obscure the issue during the election,  after having supported the ordinance openly during city debate. When six of seven candidates stated they were for repealing the ordinance, the local newspaper concluded that it was just a matter of time before the ordinance would be repealed. Several candidates felt that the issue was downplayed in the local media, but the three top vote-getters still say it was the biggest issue of concern to voters.

“As I campaigned and knocked on doors, the issue [gay rights] was asked more often than any other question,” said Russell Sights, who placed second in the races where the top four are seated. “A majority of the people are expecting us to remove the ordinance,” he said.

Michele Deep, the only incumbent seeking re-election who voted for the ordinance, said that gay rights should not have been an issue during the campaign. “I’ve said all along it’s nothing more than a human issue,” explains Deep. “It isn’t black or white, heterosexual or homosexual.”

Robby Mills voted against the ordinance and agrees with part of Deep’s comment. “She’s right on one point —  the issue of gay rights shouldn’t have anything to do with city government at all.”

Deep barely squeaked past fifth place finisher L.B. “Gip” Lawton by 120 votes, a margin representing five votes per precinct. She received nearly 700 fewer votes compared to her 1998 results, even though other candidates received record-breaking totals.

Perhaps the biggest story in the election is the final vote tally for Robby Mills. He was the most outspoken city official who opposed the ordinance in 1999.  Voters seemed to recognize that fact by awarding him the highest vote tally in city history.  Mills won 5776 votes, which beat the previous record set in 1995 by 901 votes. Sights, who finished second, also surpassed the previous record.

“I freely admit that it’s not because I’ve been such a great commissioner,” states Mills, “but it’s because of my stand against the Fairness Ordinance.” Mills will serve as mayor pro tem because he collected more votes than any other commissioner. He plans to introduce a measure to repeal the ordinance in February.

Bob Hall joined the city commission for the second time in two decades. He maintains that while he was against the ordinance, he didn’t make it the central issue in his campaign as much as the voters did. Hall says, “I think the Fairness Ordinance played a big part in this election. This was the number one subject that people were concerned about.” Mills and Sights agree as they found the same citizen concern in their campaigns.  Deep disagrees, asserting that no more than 50 people brought the issue up to her. She cites other issues as more important to the city and adds, “If this issue [gay rights] is the most important issue to our community, then shame on all of us.”

However, it is precisely that kind of casual indifference about such a highly charged moral issue that has stirred the community to acquire new representation. Mills points out that homosexuals were the ones who brought the issue up in the first place and campaigned for their cause for several months. “Government should be a role model and offer a moral framework for our community,” says Mills.

Elsewhere, there was little political change through the November elections in the areas that passed gay ordinances in 1999.  In Lexington, whose City Council overwhelmingly passed an ordinance start-to-finish in 17 days, there were minor changes in the makeup of the council and, therefore,  there is virtually no expectation of a retraction.

In Louisville, which voted for city-county merger in November, there is hope for change primarily because over the next several years all the Louisville city ordinances will have to come up for confirmation by the new governing body.  This gives a glimmer of hope for those with concerns.

In Henderson, the newly elected city commission is expected to reconsider and rescind the ordinance early next year, thus ending a passionate political season in that area of western Kentucky.
 
 
 
 

Key Family Foundation Contacts: Kent Ostrander, Executive Director Martin Cothran, Senior Associate Policy Analyst